↓ Skip to main content

Presentations to general practice before a cancer diagnosis in Victoria: a cross‐sectional survey

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Journal of Australia, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Presentations to general practice before a cancer diagnosis in Victoria: a cross‐sectional survey
Published in
Medical Journal of Australia, July 2016
DOI 10.5694/mja15.01169
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen Lacey, James F Bishop, Hannah L Cross, Patty Chondros, Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Jon D Emery

Abstract

To assess variations in the number of general practitioner visits preceding a cancer diagnosis, and in the length of the interval between the patient first suspecting a problem and their seeing a hospital specialist. Analysis of data provided to the Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES; survey response rate, 37.7%) by 1552 patients with one of 19 cancer types and treated in one of five Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre hospitals, 1 October 2012 - 30 April 2013. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had had three or more GP consultations about cancer-related health problems before being referred to hospital. The secondary outcome was the interval between the patient first suspecting a problem and their seeing a hospital specialist. 34% of the patients included in the final analyses (426 of 1248) had visited a GP at least three times before referral to a hospital doctor. The odds ratios (reference: rectal cancer; adjusted for age, sex, language spoken at home, and socio-economic disadvantage index score) varied according to cancer type, being highest for pancreatic cancer (3.2; 95% CI, 1.02-9.9), thyroid cancer (2.5; 95% CI, 0.9-6.6), vulval cancer (2.5; 95% CI, 0.7-8.7) and multiple myeloma (2.4; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5), and lowest for patients with breast cancer (0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.8), cervical cancer (0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-2.1), endometrial cancer (0.5; 95% CI, 0.2-1.4) or melanoma (0.7; 95% CI, 0.3-1.5). Cancer type also affected the duration of the interval from symptom onset to seeing a hospital doctor; it took at least 3 months for more than one-third of patients with prostate or colon cancer to see a hospital doctor. Certain cancer types were more frequently associated with multiple GP visits, suggesting they are more challenging to recognise early. In Victoria, longer intervals from the first symptoms to seeing a hospital doctor for colon or prostate cancer may reflect poorer community symptom awareness, later GP referral, or limited access to gastroenterology and urology services.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 27%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Other 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 33%
Unspecified 5 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 15%
Psychology 3 9%
Mathematics 3 9%
Other 6 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2019.
All research outputs
#3,852,641
of 13,526,991 outputs
Outputs from Medical Journal of Australia
#1,075
of 2,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,693
of 264,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Journal of Australia
#23
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,526,991 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,376 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.